Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 2 months
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Najmiah Ahmad, doctor (General Medical Council 6027449).
Decision date: 6 February 2026 · Hearing started 7 January 2026 and ended 6 February 2026
This sanction period has elapsed.
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Najmiah Ahmad's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct. In late 2023 and early 2024 she reposted two items on X that the tribunal found were objectively antisemitic and seriously offensive, including an AI-generated image suggesting Jewish involvement in the 9/11 attacks. The tribunal accepted she was not motivated by religious hostility but found she had identified herself as a doctor when reposting. On 6 February 2026 it directed a 2-month suspension with a review hearing.
Charges
Between December 2023 and January 2024, Dr Ahmad reposted on the social media site X (1) a comment about 9/11 stating that the 'Zionist owned-and-controlled mainstream media has suppressed this important story' and that '9/11 was an inside job, The Zionist owned-and-controlled US government was complicit'; and (2) a comment and AI-generated image titled '5 Dancing Zionists on 9/11 attacks' depicting figures dressed as Hasidic Jews on a rooftop with a plane flying towards the World Trade Center. The GMC alleged the reposts were objectively antisemitic, seriously offensive, and motivated wholly or in part by racial or religious hostility and/or prejudice against Jews.
Findings
The Tribunal found both reposts were objectively antisemitic and seriously offensive. It found not proved that Dr Ahmad was motivated by racial or religious hostility against Jews, accepting her account that she was using the repost function to save material for later research and was unaware that 'Zionist' could be used as a proxy for 'Jewish'. The Tribunal found her conduct amounted to serious misconduct and that her fitness to practise was impaired. The misconduct was placed at the lower end of the spectrum of seriousness, and the risk of repetition assessed as low. Insight and remediation were found to be incomplete. The Tribunal directed a 2-month suspension with a review hearing and revoked the existing interim order. No immediate order was imposed, given the low risk to public protection and the doctor's right of appeal.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Dr Ahmad's distress at the situation in Gaza which led her to use X for research; previous good character; positive testimonials; no clinical concerns; no further complaints since the events; engagement with the GMC processes and attendance at the hearing; genuine remorse; some developing insight into the offensive nature of the reposts and her use of social media; completion of a Trust social media training course; changed approach to social media use.
Aggravating factors
Dr Ahmad identified herself on X as a Consultant Anaesthetist, adding authority to her posts and potentially abusing her professional position; she showed a reckless disregard for professional standards by not following the GMC's social media guidance.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.